The entire article is definitely worth reading, but the closing paragraph sums it up pretty well:
Obviously, I'm about the last person who wants to see the Marlins leave town. I don't see the team picking up and going to Las Vegas as a real threat though. If it was legitimate, why wasn't the possibility of the Expos moving there discussed as a real possibility?
That said, I'm also not sold on the benefits of publicly financing this stadium - or any other one. For me to support such a thing, I'd really like to see someone lay out the details of the proposed economic benefits. To date the best argument that I've heard is that the Marlins need this stadium so that their financial situation can improve. A new stadium will allow them to maintain (in today's dollars) a $50 million payroll without incurring losses. Unless you have a roster, like the Marlins currently do, where key contributors like Dontrelle Willis, Miguel Cabrera, and Josh Beckett are working for relative peanuts, it's tough to stay competitive on a shoe-string budget. The Marlins won't always have such luxuries. Eventually a $50 million payroll will catch up with them, particularly when the farm system, as good as it has been, is regularly raided to pick up an Ugueth Urbina here and a Jeff Conine there.
Even if they do keep finding cheap gems like Cabrera and Willis, that still doesn't mean that it makes sense for the city, county, and or state to put up $150 million or more to shift the economic benefit of a baseball team from one super-rich person to another (merely) rich person.